My short list: T4R limited, XC90, Outback.

[PJBrendel]

It looks like I will be purchasing a new vehicle in about a month. Although I am most interested in the 4Runner I recently drove a Volvo XC90 and was impressed with the road feel compared with the T4R. The T4R felt like it required more small inputs to keep it going straight as compared to the XC90. Both test drives were fairly short so it's not fair comparison and I test drove the SR5 and not the Limited with the X-REAS so this is just the beginning of my comparison.
I am considering the T4R for many reasons, reliability, safety, comfort, and the ability to off road, especially to get on to some of the beaches here on Long Island, NY.
I test drove the XC90 because of Volvo's reputation for safety and was impressed by just how comfortable the vehicle felt, both to sit in and to drive. Although I don't think it is capable of going on soft sand, which may eliminate it completely from my list.
I keep trying to fall in love with the Outback, since it will save me about 9k in purchase price, and 500 dollars a year in gas, but the love just isn't there.
Any thoughts or experience with the Subaru or Volvo would be greatly appreciated.
Oh and, this forum is fantastic! I have really learned a lot about the 4 Runner! There is no a similar loyal following for the XC90, It was just really nice to drive!
Thanks in advance
Paul

 

[K O]

The 4Runner will never drive like a unibody / sedan-based SUV. This is body-on-frame construction - a truck. The input control you mentioned is easily remedied with wider tires and upgraded suspension.

 

[00Jay]

Coming from an 08 Cayenne S (which is a body-on-frame) SUV, I have to definitely throw a recommendation in there for it. My 08 with 72K+ miles on it rode like a unibody, towed like a workhorse, and went off road with ease. I had an extended warranty on it, but never had a problem with it. There are certified used 09's and 10's right now for $40K and less. Take a test drive.

Comparatively, my 10' 4Runner has a much harsher ride than the Cayenne. I had 20" wheels on the Cayenne for a while too and it was great at absorbing small pits and manholes in the street...the 4R, not so much.

 

[philsey]

Wow, talk about disparate choices. Frankly, I'm really surprised to see these 3 on the same list, but, whatever floats yer boat.

Suby - can't say much, I'm an SUV guy and this is a small station wagon, plus I don't wear leather elbow patches.

Volvo - I did drive this, and it is nice. Still, in the end it's a nice, upscale FWD or AWD station wagon. When I drove it, it had a V8, which was just OK - can't speak to the I-6. With aired-down tires, it'll probably handle sand - but you're going to get odd looks. ;~) Skeptical that it's safer than a big ol' 4R tho.
I'd have a Lexus RX, Pilot, or possibly a Highlander first.

4R - Well, if you've been reading here, you know how we'all feel, me among 'em. The SR5 does have quirky road manners, which are easily corrected.

Keep us posted, and welcome.

 

[49runners]

keep asking yourself how much off road you are wanting to do.

Subarus are capable vehicles going from road to dirt but nothing heavy duty off road. did look/drive outbacks and the forester. not a bad choice if we didn't have any sense of style.

XC60/XC90 - we liked both of them for its style and road handling (safety is fairly descent across the board now) but knew volvos were strictly urban driving only (dry, light snow, rain). you would probably get stuck in soft sand even if you deflated your tires. pricey

4runners - the worse road ride in comparison to the two brands mentioned above. but my wife liked sitting up high and the lose road handling didn't bother her. we have a limited and it's better than the SR5 on the road (didn't test drive TE) but both still drives like a truck. the 4runner is definitely more standout in off road conditions, even the limited, but use caution in soft sand driving. it's not for amateurs. the limited provides the best of the both world for us in terms of road and off road. so far the off road driving has been slow but capable. crawled through sand and climbed fairly steep rocky/dirt hills. on the road, it doesn't dive bomb like the SR5 but the rest was difficult to decipher the overall handling on the road between the SR5 and Limited. the most important reason my wife chose the 4runner is for its reliability. my 3rd gen almost hit 200k before i sold it without major breakdown issues. skip the 3rd row unless you want to force people you don't like to sit in the back, but then why would you want people you don't like in your vehicle?

i would say the gas mileage is poor for all three brands but we were looking for utility. our dog loves the rear sliding window and we love the feature because we can just roll down the windows to quickly air out the runner when he farts back there.

 

[chetJ]

These three were on my list too. The reason I chose T4R 2011 LE was because of its reliability, because I liked the ride and the comfort of the 2nd row bench seat that allows me to put a child seat on there and also sit 2 adults if needed.
Subaru OB- I test drove one for about 30 minutes and there was absolutely no 'life' in the driving experience imo.
XC90- Great SUV but my research seemed to suggest that most Volvo's ran into major problems down the line.

 

[Stifler]

4R cause the other two are for women

 

[RubiconSS]

Using the OBX as an example (been going down for about 30 years) I have pulled out a fair amount of SUV's. Never had to pull a Jeep or a Toyota out of 4 freshly dug holes. Subarus, Volvos, Cadillacs, etc - quite a few.
As mentioned, balance of reliability, versatility and just all around "Fun Factor" the 4runner is hard to beat and just when the interest starts to wane you can "tweek" and modify your 4runner, not so with the other vehicles on your short list.

 

[jspagna1]

Interesting choices! My brother-in-laws brothers wife had the Volvo but no longer has it as she had a lot of problems with it always being in the shop for one thing or another. Yes a safe vehicle though.
The Suby's have a good track record,but to be honest with you the only Subaru I would own is the Legacy and the previous model year at that. Just don't like the new body style. But again brand wise have heard good things all around.

When I was shopping for a new SUV my concerns were cargo space/comfort/ & size.
My short list consisted of the following vehicles:
1. 4Runner
2. CX9 (Just not me)
3. Pathfinder(Boxy)
4. Pilot (Ugly-Boxy)
5. Acadia (Quality ???)

 

[bamma]

My sister has an XC90 that I took to a ski resort during a storm in Utah. It handled great on the plowed roads.

However, we managed to get stuck in the parking lot when other 4wd trucks were zooming around us. I'm sure the stock tires were part of it, but the xc didnt meet my expectations. We were able to eventually get unstuck, but it is obvious the xc90 was designed to be driven on well maintained roads.

 

[tjnaples]

Chances are you'll find people on a 4Runner forum recommend a 4Runner.

 

[Bourbonator]

the xc90 felt like it had a larger turning radius than an f350 longbed, but it was pretty comfortable for long drives.

 

[PJBrendel]

This is such a great forum! Thanks for all of the input! I have come to some similar conclusions about the Volvo and the Subaru. Volvo repairs seem to be a little more frequent and a bit more expensive than the Toyota. I think some of the earlier Volvo's were safer than some of the other cars on the road but I don't know if that's true anymore. And it is AWD not 4WD so I’d be stuck in sand more than with the other two. The Subaru Outback has gotten larger and is pretty capable in the sand, but it is lower and lighter than the T4R and therefore doesn't seem to feel as safe or have carrying capacity (A lot less money though).
The T4R will be a big change for me since I have spent the last sixteen years and 250K miles behind the wheel(s) of two Honda Accord sedans. So I am used to the solid road feel of that unibody sedan. The truck feel of the 4Runner is something that I will have to get used to if I go that route, and I probably will. I'm looking for something that will get me through the next ten years or so and the Toyota seems to have that kind of reliability.
The T4R is very appealing to me since I have two kids (8 & 14) and want to start taking trips to see more of the east coast. The ability to get off road would be a major plus since my son and I both surf and surf cast. Fortunately we have a good amount of time to play in the summer, since my wife and I are both teachers. So we could get a lot of use from the 4wd. I used to go camping down in Cape Hatteras back in the late seventies and would like to see it again; I'd also like to explore Cape Cod.
Yea, it will probably be a 4Runner, just wanted to see if anyone had considered or owned the Subaru or the Volvo.

 

[Bay33saw]

LOL, I had the exact same list

When I was shopping for a new SUV my concerns were cargo space/comfort/ & size.
My short list consisted of the following vehicles:
1. 4Runner
2. CX9 (Sporty but the rear did not fold completly flat)
3. Pathfinder (Ugly)
4. Pilot (Ugly both inside and out)
5. Acadia (Reliability)

I test drove 3 LE's and test drove them quite hard, flooring it heavy braking etc....but as soon as I opened the sunroof and the rear window that did it for me, you get an awesome breeze through the truck. Plus when I was in San Jose I went surfing with my brother-in-law and with the rear window down and the seats flat I could put the surf boards in the back with a little sticking out.

Oh and I get aregular 20-21 MPG in my bone stock LE

 

[SgnDen]

4R cause the other two are for women

Yup - And there's that for sure.

 

[jspagna1]

I drove my 3rd gen SR5 to Cape Cod(Chatham) many times over the last 15 years and always got there with no issues or breakdowns. Looking forward to doing the same with my 2011 SR5 4Runner as well and with more comfort and cargo space to boot!

 

[Glock_19]

If it were strictly on road I would buy the Volvo. I had a 2001 S60 and loved the road manners of that car. The only repair I ever had in 9 years of ownership was a new water pump (granted it cost $900).

If you do light off-roading but spend most of your time in civilization then I would get the Outback. I've driven a few Outbacks in the deep stuff out in Utah and they work great. The new ones even have as much clearance as a 4th gen 4Runner so it's a pretty capable car with better gas mileage than the 4Runner.

If you're dead set on getting off the pavement and to remote places, you tow, or you want to sit up high then the 4Runner it is. You're going to get worse gas mileage and it will drive like a truck but it has a lot of utility. Personally, I struggled between getting the 4Runner and the Outback but in the end I chose the 4Runner for back-country camping trips.

 

[Jtraskell]

PJ, based on your first post, this was your "only" or at least most immediate concern/observation..."The T4R felt like it required more small inputs to keep it going straight as compared to the XC90". To that end, you were spot on.

The reason IMHO is two fold. Crappy OEM tires but more importantly, the factory Caster setting. I am VERY confident that if you drove an SR5 with a Castor setting closer to positive 4.0 (which is still within specs) vs. what seems to come out of the factory, which is closer to 2.5 (again, within OEM spec's), you would find a much different driving experience. Much closer to the XC90 or any other vehicle that you are used to driving.

In addition, due to the size and weight of the 4runner and IMHO the under size/rated OEM "P" sized tires....there is a lot more steering, body roll and even nose dive issues which are greatly reduced or depending on personal opinion, eliminated, just by getting better "stronger" tires. I would go with "C" rated LT tires. (6 ply). I have D rated (8) ply, only because they were on sale. (I no longer have body roll or nose dive issues, just with the new tires and steering is a dream after changing the caster settings).

Also, most of the members here have achieved many of the same results regarding body roll and nose dive by changing to a more stiffer suspension. It really depends on your usage intent. By the sounds of it, street driving and sand. Sounds like changing the alignment and tires will be your best bet. If however, you decide to go on more heavy trails, rocks, etc. etc.
Or going to start towing a camper etc. You might want to consider both..and maybe even stiffer tires.

Be Safe.

 

[jspagna1]

If it were strictly on road I would buy the Volvo. I had a 2001 S60 and loved the road manners of that car. The only repair I ever had in 9 years of ownership was a new water pump (granted it cost $900).

That's another issue with Volvo's, replacement parts are expensive. Years ago I was looking at a Volvo 850T and a Audi A6 4.2L for my wife till my mechanic who works on European cars talked me out of them. He said parts for Audi,Saab, & Volvo are more expensive than parts for MB & BMW's.

 

[Jivewalker]

I just recently trade a 2006 XC90 V8 and replaced it with the trail edition runner. The volvo was great, but expensive to maintain. The third row seating was actually very comfortable as well. The reason I traded was a transmission stutter that developed at 90k miles, out of warranty. I was not expecting this and quick traded it. Once we went out of warranty the expenses piled up. There are a ton of safety sensors, etc., that have a life span. Once they start failing, it gets expensive. Overall, I thought my xc was great, and safe. It handled well in the snow also. It was by far the most comfortable car I have ever owned. If you do end up buying one, I have a cargo barrier cage I'll sell you! Hope my input helps.